Michael Bay's "Transformers" Vs. The Fantastic Four (merged 2)

[Kelly]

Well the press seems to think 48 million was crap for MI:III.
That was the gist of practically every entertainment headline today. When the studio itself was expecting 65 million, 48 is definitely crap.
It's also substantially less than MI:II opened with, and that film did not have nearly the critical raves this one had going for it.
What does this "have to do" with this thread AND the FF? I'm sorry, I thought this thread (which has meandered all over the place at times) had become primarily about box office expectations and comparisons. I happen to think it's worth noting that even a supposedly sure-fire blockbuster like MI:III can shockingly under-perform, just as FF1 surprised Hollywood last year by breaking the long slump. Nothing in the movie biz is a "sure thing" anymore.
As for Cruisazy, it's officially open season on his nutty ass (the season runs from May 1st - Sept.5th) and I never miss an opportunity.
But I'll try to keep it on topic from now on.

Yeah the BO expectations of the 2 movies is what its about thats why its a vs. thread...which i don't necessarily think is a good idea to have, but the mods seem to differ on that so...so be it.....and again i'm sure theres a hate thread somewhere about Tom where you could take this....all this stuff does is start fights, and bring trolls (especially had this come out during a time when this forum is full of people...just lucky there are so few here)...i'm not a Cruise fan myself, he's just not a fav of mine, but this random stuff is alittle out of left field and strange...if your reason was to point out that nothing is a sure thing it could have been done, i feel like you would have done that in your first post about Cruise, you didn't therefore i'm not sure that was your reason for the post, but your nutty ass comment certainly tells me where the motive lies....you're better than than this kind of petty post Malus, or at least you've shown that around here....

How about..."Guys, ya know the Box Office is just not predictable these days...look at MI3 this past weekend, it fell well below what the movie industry thought it would at 48 mil. So we can speculate who will be first, last, whatever...but the point is....no one really knows what Transformers or F4 2 will do at the Box Office, theres just no guarantees anymore." Now had it been stated like this, I would have totally gotten your point, but ....

 

[Malus]

Yeah the BO expectations of the 2 movies is what its about thats why its a vs. thread...which i don't necessarily think is a good idea to have, but the mods seem to differ on that so...so be it.....and again i'm sure theres a hate thread somewhere about Tom where you could take this....all this stuff does is start fights, and bring trolls (especially had this come out during a time when this forum is full of people...just lucky there are so few here)...i'm not a Cruise fan myself, he's just not a fav of mine, but this random stuff is alittle out of left field and strange...if your reason was to point out that nothing is a sure thing it could have been done, i feel like you would have done that in your first post about Cruise, you didn't therefore i'm not sure that was your reason for the post, but your nutty ass comment certainly tells me where the motive lies....you're better than than this kind of petty post Malus, or at least you've shown that around here....

How about..."Guys, ya know the Box Office is just not predictable these days...look at MI3 this past weekend, it fell well below what the movie industry thought it would at 48 mil. So we can speculate who will be first, last, whatever...but the point is....no one really knows what Transformers or F4 2 will do at the Box Office, theres just no guarantees anymore." Now had it been stated like this, I would have totally gotten your point, but ....

Yeesh. One off-the-cuff jab at a celebrity and my posts are labeled "weird," "strange" and "petty." Who do you think I am, Tom Cruise?

I didn't think there was anything "random" about what I wrote. I even prefaced it with "By the way..." And there was no agenda or motive; I thought reporting the box office factoid was self-explanatory. Especially considering I followed that by comparing the dismal MI:III numbers to the considerably higher numbers last year for FF & Batman Begins, two somewhat beloved films around these parts. I think it's hilarious that the flawed FF film grossed so much more on its opening weekend than the most anticipated movie of this season starring the (former) biggest star in the world.

But, no, sadly, there's no "Tom hating" thread in Community. I looked and looked for someplace to spread my weird, strange, petty bile but all I saw were "Hottest Chick" and Bush-bashing threads. (I stopped in to bash Bush a tad, but it's just not the same. )

I consider myself to be an honest guy, so I'll admit to an utter contempt for Tom Cruise these days. I'm not happy about it, because I'd always kinda liked him until last year, and it was disturbing to me to see the guy I found so likable in "real" life, and so enthralling in Rain Man and Magnolia verbally railing against Matt Laurer over his supposed ignorance about anti-depressants, attacking Brooke Shields for treating her post-partum depression andliterally denouncing all drugs as "evil"...and then reading that his War of the Worlds contract required that Paramount allow a Scientology conversion tent to be set up throughout the shooting...I mean, jeez, I'm the biggest proponent for religious freedom and free speech that you'll ever meet, but here's a guy using his celebrity clout to essentially pressure employees into accepting his religion/cult... It's all just surreal to me, and so very disappointing.
So yes, I admit, my delight at seeing his misbehavior so greviously affect his marketablity certainly motivated me to dub him "Cruisazy" in my post. But it didn't occur to me to change that out of consideration to anyone's sensitivities. I almost censored myself on the Bush joke above, but decided it was basically innocuous and more a dig at the intelligence level of a lot of what goes on in "Community" than a dig at the President.
However, if I'd been referring to anyone connected with superhero movies or comics, I can almost guarantee that I would have deleted it.

Considering we just had somebody calling Keanu Reeves a "talentless piece of trash" elsewhere on this board (seemingly to no one's offense)I think my off-the-cuff jab at Tom was a little tame, especially considering how I really do feel about him.

Anyway... I still think it's cool that Cruise's MC:III opening was outgunned by "our" team's last 2 offerings: Batman and the F4.
If we see some 60 to 70 million dollar openings for X-Men III and Superman Returns, then I think comicbook adaptations become even more attractive to Hollywood.

I just want the movies to be good.

 

[Kelly]

Yeesh. One off-the-cuff jab at a celebrity and my posts are labeled "weird," "strange" and "petty." Who do you think I am, Tom Cruise?

There was nothing "random" about what I wrote. I even prefaced it with "By the way..." And there was no agenda or motive; I thought reporting the box office factoid was self-explanatory. Especially considering I followed that by comparing the dismal MI:III numbers to the considerably higher numbers last year for FF & Batman Begins, two somewhat beloved films around these parts. I think it's hilarious that the flawed FF film grossed so much more on its opening weekend than the most anticipated movie of this season starring the (former) biggest star in the world.

But, no, sadly, there's no "Tom hating" thread in Community. I looked and looked for someplace to spread my weird, strange, petty bile but all I saw were "Hottest Chick" and Bush-bashing threads. (I stopped in to bash Bush a tad, but it's just not the same. )

I consider myself to be an honest guy, so I'll admit to an utter contempt for Tom Cruise these days. I'm not happy about it, because I'd always kinda liked him until last year, and it was disturbing to me to see the guy I found so likable in "real" life, and so enthralling in Rain Man and Magnolia verbally railing against Matt Laurer over his supposed ignorance about anti-depressants, attacking Brooke Shields for treating her post-partum depression andliterally denouncing all drugs as "evil"...and then reading that his War of the Worlds contract required that Paramount allow a Scientology conversion tent to be set up throughout the shooting...I mean, jeez, I'm the biggest proponent for religious freedom and free speech that you'll ever meet, but here's a guy using his celebrity clout to essentially pressure employees into accepting his religion/cult... It's all just surreal to me, and so very disappointing.
So yes, I admit, my delight at seeing his misbehavior so greviously affect his marketablity certainly motivated me to dub him "Cruisazy" in my post. But it didn't occur to me to change that out of consideration to anyone's sensitivities. I almost censored myself on the Bush joke above, but decided it was basically innocuous and more a dig at the intelligence level of a lot of what goes on in "Community" than a dig at the President.
However, if I'd been referring to anyone connected with superhero movies or comics, I can almost guarantee that I would have deleted it.

Considering we just had somebody calling Keanu Reeves a "talentless piece of trash" elsewhere on this board (seemingly to no one's offense)
I think my off-the-cuff jab at Tom was a little tame, especially considering how I really do feel about him.

Anyway... I still think it's cool that Cruise's MC:III opening was outgunned by "our" team's last 2 offerings: Batman and the F4.
If we see some 60 to 70 million dollar openings for X-Men III and Superman Returns, then I think comicbook adaptations become even more attractive to Hollywood.

I just want the movies to be good.

Sorry, if my post to you was kinda harsh.....

As far as the Keanu Reeves comment, actually I didn't see that...but AT LEAST the thread was about Keanu Reeves...

But I will stand by my....

..."Guys, ya know the Box Office is just not predictable these days...look at MI3 this past weekend, it fell well below what the movie industry thought it would at 48 mil. So we can speculate who will be first, last, whatever...but the point is....no one really knows what Transformers or F4 2 will do at the Box Office, theres just no guarantees anymore."

Is a much better way to have gotten your point across without slamming an actor in the process...I guess I think enough of you and your posts to have expected more from you...and again, reading your very first post about Tom,

Well said; right on the nose.

By the way, I'm sure lots of you have read or heard about the huge disappointment at the box office this past weekend for Tom Cruisazy's Mission Impossible III...
65 million was anticipated, but it grossed only 48 million.
FF and Batman Begins both opened to bigger numbers last year!

you mentioned absolutely nothing of what you wrote in the second....and BY THE WAY...only strengthened the randomness of it...I just thought you were above using those types of things to make your point......your post above truly explains your others...thanks for the explanation. Whether I agree or disagree with your thoughts on Cruise, I really see no need to use them to make any point other than to slam an actor you don't like....it doesn't make any other point than that....in my opinion.

Unfortunately I have helped to turn this thread into what I figured it would become.....

My apologies to Cappy...

 

[Kelly]

48 million is crap for the first big summer weekend at the movies. However it did make 70 million overseas so that helps a bit. The overseas market will save many films as it will MI:3, The Island, and more to come.

And Fantastic Four, if I remember correctly...

 

[blind_fury]

What do you care you'll be in the family room playing with your Transformers dolls.

Optimus Prime >>>>> You

 

[Kelly]

Optimus Prime >>>>> You

PDNFTT

 

[blind_fury]

PDNFTT

PPHGFFFSTTVBNHKJ!

 

[killbill22]

Harry Potter is coming out in November, they announced it a while back.

July 13 2007.

 

[Kelly]

Already been corrected....several posts back...

 

[deathshead2]

F4 moved yes HAHAHA transformers truly more than meets the eye.

 

[Milkman95]

Yeah, Fox made the right move to get out of the way.

 

[deathshead2]

I think they did as well they can plan better now made more than likely some more cash. But im happy transformers stayed its ground now I can see both when they open on different weeks.

 

[liesse00]

The Order of Phoenix just took a release date of July 13

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/schedule/?view=changes&p=.htm

There you go, and I'm the one that posted it too.

 

[Stringer]

Guess thats the end of this thread. Fox punked out, even though the move may turn out to be smart.

 

[Mr Sensitive]

F4 moved yes HAHAHA transformers truly more than meets the eye.

Of course: with the very bad reviews of the first weak movie, Fox knows they wouldn't stand the competition from Transformers.

 

[Milkman95]

Of course: with the very bad reviews of the first weak movie, Fox knows they wouldn't stand the competition from Transformers.

Ouch...........

 

[Carp Man]

Of course: with the very bad reviews of the first weak movie, Fox knows they wouldn't stand the competition from Transformers.

I beg to differ. If Transformers doesn't fall flat on it's keester, I'll be shocked. Competition ? What competition ? Fox moved for purly finacial reasons, not because they felt any threating presence from Transformers.

 

[Mr Sensitive]

Fox moved for purly finacial reasons, not because they felt any threating presence from Transformers.

Competition.

 

[Carp Man]

Competition.

Exactly. It would pull away, whatever it makes opening weeken from FF2. Even if it's 10 million.

 

[Mr Sensitive]

Exactly. It would pull away, whatever it makes opening weeken from FF2. Even if it's 10 million.

Thingy, carissimo: face the truth. They know they have a bad product, that sticks at first like some bad lie.

With the time (and DVD), people understand it was not all that and will think, about the second: "well, let's wait for the DVD.

Fox knows that, because it is not planning any improvements, doing the same thing it did with the first, and think: "let's not compromise our money, let's move it".

It's business, and just business.

 

[Carp Man]

Thingy, carissimo: face the truth. They know they have a bad product, that sticks at first like some bad lie.

With the time (and DVD), people understand it was not all that and will think, about the second: "well, let's wait for the DVD.

Fox knows that, because it is not planning any improvements, doing the same thing it did with the first, and think: "let's not compromise our money, let's move it".

It's business, and just business.

As always, you have your opinion ( Stinker ). I have mine ( Better movie ). I perfer looking at the glass half full, then your half empty. But we'll see soon enough.

 

[Mr Sensitive]

As always, you have your opinion ( Stinker ). I have mine ( Better movie ). I perfer looking at the glass half full, then your half empty. But we'll see soon enough.

Fair enough.

But this cliché of "half full/ half empty" is really disgraceful, and has been thrown around here often.

I propose a different approach: I don't want to be served bad wine, and others don't care about having grape juice with a bit of alcohol.

 

[Malkavian]

Fair enough.

But this cliché of "half full/ half empty" is really disgraceful, and has been thrown around here often.

I propose a different approach: I don't want to be served bad wine, and others don't care about having grape juice with a bit of alcohol.

No, but your constant "we're all gonna die" attitude before you have seen anything is a bit of a stretch and very revealing of your extreme bias already and production has not even started yet!...LOL
here's a thought, why not wait for the movie, then make a decision...

I do agree with you on one point though, I also think that the Fox executives must have learned something from the last film, as in the reviews could have been better.I do hope that they learned that the story needs alot "more" the second time around.

 

[Mr Sensitive]

Right.

This rant against "we are all gonna die" from one who calls himself Malkavian. You're already dead, fellow.

Seriously: I am a great reader of FF comics. I like them a lot, and know their potential. I also happen to be really into movies: this first FF was awful (and saved only by Chiklis and Evans), and I know precisely who was to blame for it.

So, when Fox starts to act exactly like it did in the first one, I don't like it. They should have fired Story and announced great news on the script, FX, cinematography and direction.

So far, we can have some hope on the script and the FX. But it is too little yet. Gimme more good news (real good news), and I'll sing like a songbird.

 

[Carp Man]

Right.

This rant against "we are all gonna die" from one who calls himself Malkavian. You're already dead, fellow.

Seriously: I am a great reader of FF comics. I like them a lot, and know their potential. I also happen to be really into movies: this first FF was awful (and saved only by Chiklis and Evans), and I know precisely who was to blame for it.

So, when Fox starts to act exactly like it did in the first one, I don't like it. They should have fired Story and announced great news on the script, FX, cinematography and direction.

So far, we can have some hope on the script and the FX. But it is too little yet. Gimme more good news (real good news), and I'll sing like a songbird.

Good news as in George Lucas writing and directing ? Or how about Spielberg writing and Lucas directing ? Then mabey we'd have a sequel to your liking. Or Lucas writing, and Spilberg directing ? Or Spielberg writing and directing ? Not in this lifetime, but let's speulate here.